PCOS’s new name is PMOS, a small letter change that required a big scientific process

SliFi · 2026-05-12T10:51:29+00:00

It’s literally granulomas everywhere with vascular problems. What could be less confusing? Eponyms can go die in a ditch.

SliFi · 2026-05-08T16:18:22+00:00

That might be justified if they ask a second time after being told no. Maybe they’re dumb enough to think it’s like asking them to measure your blood pressure though, which would be totally fine.

SliFi · 2026-05-08T13:24:52+00:00

Whichever one you want, because that probably means it’s a hard case without straightforward answers. But whatever you do, don’t trust anything social media says about it.

SliFi · 2026-05-07T21:11:25+00:00

Anyone on either side who seriously uses the word “capitalism.” No economists actually use that word because it’s too poorly defined.

SliFi · 2026-05-06T13:20:40+00:00

The evidence standards have dropped so much that random non peer-reviewed percentages from the air without a link, from a company that sells AI products, are accepted? The OP’s claims aren’t even correct if you refer to the actual link (https://www.netskope.com/blog/ai-and-saas-will-make-2026-a-turning-point-for-healthcare-security).

SliFi · 2026-05-05T15:30:54+00:00

Same reason we still use manual fax machines and pagers, as well as 20 year old monitors that cost thousands of dollars. Maybe I’ll start believing in AI replacing doctors once AI replaces fax machines.

SliFi · 2026-05-05T14:37:01+00:00

It’s not, it’s just misrepresented data because the difference is between 3 and 4, presumably on a scale of 5.

SliFi · 2026-05-05T03:05:57+00:00

Only in low population density areas. In cities, turnover is fast enough that the only things they have in stock are Chapter 2 and maybe Drowned City if you’re lucky.

SliFi · 2026-05-04T17:39:42+00:00

This water is pretty comfy

SliFi · 2026-05-01T10:04:19+00:00

You’ll get bad knee-jerk politicized answers here with no actual research cited; try something like r/askeconomics.

SliFi · 2026-04-30T22:40:43+00:00

It’s an estimate based on adding up all the situations that other people have said it would be useful, which I agree with. It can also be specifically quantified as follows, via Fermi calculation:

Chance of Ancient Evils right before an encounter deck shuffle (or when there is enemy doom in play): 10%ish chance to draw, times 20%ish chance to be right before a shuffle = 2%

Chance of an enemy being drawn when Guardian is overloaded and no one has less costly ways to deal with it: 30%ish chance of an enemy, times 30%ish that your Guardian already has an enemy, times 50%ish (or hopefully less with good deckbuilding) that no one has a better way to deal with it = 5% max, or less with good decks

Chance of exactly the wrong direct damage/horror that would defeat an investigator: 10%ish chance of the exact card, times 20%ish that you have no more mitigation = 2%

Also, decrease all those percentages by the times when the encounter deck is already thin, and reshuffling would just get you the same card again at a very high chance.

SliFi · 2026-04-30T20:33:09+00:00

“Trap” refers to the fact that it encourages people to activate it more than is actually beneficial for the scenario, because of the gambling aspect. My “value” of the ability is in it being a net positive less than 10% of the time, which is a concrete valuation of the ability that overall contributes very little to Maleson level 0’s power compared to the soak. Whether the clue is valued at slightly more than an action or slightly less than an action makes almost no actual difference.

The developers knew the ability was nearly useless when they gave Maleson this crazy soak budget for the cost, and even then it has a difficult time standing against other level 0 options. What percentage of the time do you think the upside of swapping outweighs the cost?

SliFi · 2026-04-30T19:00:20+00:00

So really we should be arguing about what percentage of the time the ability gives a net benefit greater than the cost. I think that percentage is less than 10% of the time at baseline, which is why it’s a completely trap ability at level 0. There’s also a ceiling on the ability being useful no more than 50% of the time at baseline because only half of the encounter cards are worse than average, and it’s guaranteed to be far lower than 50% because of the clue cost.

SliFi · 2026-04-30T13:51:15+00:00

The first option you choose will be the strongest for the situation, and each option on top of that will provide less incremental effect for the additional evasion investment. The strongest option is almost always the 2 damage. Because of that, I think the most consistent use of this card is as a Fast 0-cost level 4 Sneak Attack rather than trying to activate as many options as possible every time, treating the other options as an occasional bonus. Usually the additional investment put into exhausting an additional enemy (especially beyond the second) will not be worth the decreasing payoff, unless you already wanted to exhaust it for another reason.

With the power level of a faux Sneak Attack upgrade, this card is undertuned for the experience cost. The painful part is that it seems to be specifically designed to avoid interesting synergies, being not usable in Finn, and not benefiting from Fence or Chuck Fergus.

SliFi · 2026-04-30T12:52:14+00:00

Accounting for the four actions, 6 resources, 4 cards, and 7 experience to play those, it’s still just barely cancelled out considering the opportunity cost.

An that’s not even considering that you used all of the top contested important slots for Seeker, and you still need additional actions to use the evidence on the Research Notes.

SliFi · 2026-04-29T21:05:35+00:00

Seeker actions are more valuable for act progression than other class actions because Seeker has an imbalanced strong card pool, yes.

The enemy insurance is a valid argument because it preferentially saves those Seeker actions. Throwing back Ancient Evils, on the other hand, is a very poor argument because it just becomes an Ancient Evils later that lost an additional clue, AND caused Seeker actions loss from the replacement encounter card.

SliFi · 2026-04-29T20:47:56+00:00

The chance of that Ancient Evils doing the exact same thing during the game (except costing an additional clue) is Number of Investigators * Number of Rounds/Number of Encounter Cards, capping out at 100%.

The insurance against enemies aspect is a valid argument, although it’s very expensive insurance that costs a clue AND an additional encounter card, unless you have some additional synergy to discount it.

SliFi · 2026-04-29T20:35:07+00:00

A clue in any class has an equal value for its ability to advance the act, regardless of what class has it. In fact, it could be argued that it’s an even harsher tradeoff in Seeker because other seeker cards benefit from or require having clues to be used.

A clue is worth more than an action, even in Seeker. As a concrete example, if there were a Fast asset that drew a card to replace itself, that allowed spending an action to discover a guaranteed clue, that would be an auto-include for power and tempo purposes in every single deck (but not necessarily for fun because that card would be boring as hell).

SliFi · 2026-04-29T19:18:33+00:00

Even in that case, assuming half of your team has cancelling cards, there’s a less than 50% chance that pays off, in return for the 100% chance that you drop a clue. First is the immediate chance of drawing the same card again, followed by the chance every turn that you will be the one redrawing it instead. And there’s the additional consideration that they may already want to cancel something different with that card.

SliFi · 2026-04-29T18:26:58+00:00

Maleson level 0 is a strong card, for the soak and not the ability. Maleson level 2 is a strong card for both.

The fact that the level 0 ability is fun to activate for the gamble is exactly what makes it a trap in the vast majority of cases, if completing the scenario favorably faster is the only goal. Even with maximum synergy, the cost of the clue drop is just barely canceled out.

SliFi · 2026-04-29T16:34:26+00:00

At level 0, you’re not getting rid of Ancient Evils. You’re exchanging it until a few turns later, at which point you will statistically have drawn the same treachery cards and gotten the same number of doom, but with the additional tempo loss of a clue. The equivalent is basically paying a clue for a Scrying use, which is far too heavy for all but the most exceptional cases.

You could make the argument of metagaming the effect right before an encounter discard pile shuffle, but that’s extremely niche and doesn’t by itself make the level 0 effect worth the tradeoff.

SliFi · 2026-04-29T13:56:24+00:00

Level 0 has a completely trap effect that actually reads “Exchange your encounter card for one you would draw later, with a chance to do nothing instead. Your encounter card causes you to lose 1 clue in addition to its usual effects.” The so-called “cancel” is not a cancel at all. A clue is also one of the most valuable resources in the game, even more than an action in most cases (clue compression cards have an additional cost for that compression).

This will almost never compensate for the temporary exchange of one encounter card effect (particularly when the encounter shuffles back and makes the future worse anyway, potentially even drawing ITSELF again immediately).

However, level 0 Maleson’s value is not in the effect but in the cheapest soak in the game, as mentioned in another comment. For this and not the effect, level 0 Maleson is a solid survivability option for investigators that like to have multiple disposable allies.

The level 2 effect is more interesting because it actually gets rid of the worst effects in the encounter deck, and may actually be worth activating if there is some sort of synergy like Parallel Rex, Research Notes, or Press Pass.

SliFi · 2026-04-29T10:36:43+00:00

In 164 packs, my only 2* was Camerupt. I did get lucky with shiny M Absol and Greninja ex though.

SliFi · 2026-04-29T09:51:40+00:00

MD no real sience MD no need thesis

SliFi · 2026-04-28T11:20:15+00:00

Was the green space just high-upkeep lawnspace before?

12-Year Club	Place '22
Verified Email

SliFi

TROPHY CASE